limit of trim = limit of travel?

Peter Dohm writes:

I do not presently fly, but plan to do so in the future. Therefore, please
do not start out with a PC simulator--especially with a single monitor--as a
starting point for learning to fly in visual conditions. Doing so will
teach you to fixate on exactly the wrong things, you will rarely look at the
right things, and the thought of subsequently having to share the sky with
anyone who is doing that really SCARES THE LIVING CRAP OUT OF ME!!!!!

The jury is still out on whether prior sim experience is good or bad, and it
may depend to some extent on the individual, the instructor's preferred
methods, etc. I believe a prospective pilot can learn a lot more from a book
and a sim than from a book alone.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Peter Dohm writes:

I do not presently fly, but plan to do so in the future. Therefore,
please
do not start out with a PC simulator--especially with a single
monitor--as a
starting point for learning to fly in visual conditions. Doing so will
teach you to fixate on exactly the wrong things, you will rarely look at
the
right things, and the thought of subsequently having to share the sky
with
anyone who is doing that really SCARES THE LIVING CRAP OUT OF ME!!!!!

The jury is still out on whether prior sim experience is good or bad, and
it
may depend to some extent on the individual, the instructor's preferred
methods, etc. I believe a prospective pilot can learn a lot more from a
book
and a sim than from a book alone.

Yeah, but you believe a lot of stupid ****.

Absent any actually experience, your opinion means nothing.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Benjamin Dover writes:

You can do it with FAR LESS instruments than are found in a
typical C182. If you can't maintain constant altitude in a C182 in
visual
conditions without it being a pain, you're too ****ing incompetent to fly
on instruments.

Motion cues are absent and visual cues are limited in the sim, which may
be a
factor. However, I'm sure I'll get better with practice. I may try to
install Reality XP instruments, which are smoother in motion and better
for
detecting small changes.

Try one of the sim groups. Maybe they give a ****.

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:12:54 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

WingFlaps wrote in news:ad8fc9c9-57cb-4733-9e97-
:

On Apr 30, 9:37*am, wrote:
On Apr 29, 2:24 pm, WingFlaps wrote:

I don't follow this. The trim surface operates in the opposite
direction to the trimmed surface and takes area away from it.
Explain
please?

Cheers

* * * *The trim tab generates a force that moves the trailing edge
of
the control surface. So if you trim nose-up, you'll be moving the tab
downward, where it forces the elevator up.

Yes that is exactly what I said. So, does the trim actually improve
control responsiveness or not?

Do you mean if oyu move the trim tab in the same direction as the
elevator? IN general, yes, it will.


Bertie

Cheers




control responsiveness? no absolutely not.
trim will change where the apparent zero force neutral position is as
sensed from the control column.

responsiveness in elevator is only changed by cg position.
responsiveness in rudder doesnt change nor does aileron.

btw this area stuff wingflaps talks about is clueless.

Stealth Pilot

Stealth Pilot wrote in
:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:12:54 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

WingFlaps wrote in news:ad8fc9c9-57cb-4733-9e97-
:

On Apr 30, 9:37*am, wrote:
On Apr 29, 2:24 pm, WingFlaps wrote:

I don't follow this. The trim surface operates in the opposite
direction to the trimmed surface and takes area away from it.
Explain
please?

Cheers

* * * *The trim tab generates a force that moves the trailing edge
of
the control surface. So if you trim nose-up, you'll be moving the
tab
downward, where it forces the elevator up.

Yes that is exactly what I said. So, does the trim actually improve
control responsiveness or not?

Do you mean if oyu move the trim tab in the same direction as the
elevator? IN general, yes, it will.


Bertie

Cheers




control responsiveness? no absolutely not.


Sure it will. Authority will be increased if the tab is moved in the
same direction as the surface, especially at low speeds. You're reaching
a more ideal camber.

trim will change where the apparent zero force neutral position is as
sensed from the control column.


Yes, of course, but I'm not talking about feel, I'm talking about the
actual power of the surfaces.


responsiveness in elevator is only changed by cg position.
responsiveness in rudder doesnt change nor does aileron.

btw this area stuff wingflaps talks about is clueless.

Area?

Bertie

"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in
:


"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Peter Dohm writes:

I do not presently fly, but plan to do so in the future. Therefore,
please
do not start out with a PC simulator--especially with a single
monitor--as a
starting point for learning to fly in visual conditions. Doing so
will teach you to fixate on exactly the wrong things, you will
rarely look at the
right things, and the thought of subsequently having to share the
sky with
anyone who is doing that really SCARES THE LIVING CRAP OUT OF
ME!!!!!

The jury is still out on whether prior sim experience is good or bad,
and it
may depend to some extent on the individual, the instructor's
preferred methods, etc. I believe a prospective pilot can learn a
lot more from a book
and a sim than from a book alone.

Yeah, but you believe a lot of stupid ****.

Absent any actually experience, your opinion means nothing.


Way to go stabilised boi.


Bertie

"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in
:


"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Benjamin Dover writes:

You can do it with FAR LESS instruments than are found in a
typical C182. If you can't maintain constant altitude in a C182 in
visual
conditions without it being a pain, you're too ****ing incompetent
to fly on instruments.

Motion cues are absent and visual cues are limited in the sim, which
may be a
factor. However, I'm sure I'll get better with practice. I may try
to install Reality XP instruments, which are smoother in motion and
better for
detecting small changes.

Try one of the sim groups. Maybe they give a ****.


What do they give you?

Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Tina writes:

You said single piston, not single engine. Show me an airplane with a
significant climb rate using a single piston.

Single-engine Otto cycle reciprocating internal combustion engine.


Why not two strokes?


Bertie

"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in
:


wrote in message
news:dd3d76f7-4d65-41de-afa8-c89dcf2651e6
@q1g2000prf.googlegroups.com..
.
On May 1, 3:15 pm, Tina wrote:
You said single piston, not single engine. Show me an airplane with
a significant climb rate using a single piston.

Here's one. Just one piston, too.

http://video.google.ca/videosearch?h...0Airplane&um=1
&ie=UT
F-8&sa=N&tab=wv

Dan




Now there is a man with Honeck's money and Bertie's brains.

Awww, you're just being hurtful now.

BTW, Jay still has more money than the chattels he's ensnared.


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Benjamin Dover writes:

You can do it with FAR LESS instruments than are found in a
typical C182. If you can't maintain constant altitude in a C182 in
visual conditions without it being a pain, you're too ****ing
incompetent to fly on instruments.

Motion cues are absent and visual cues are limited in the sim, which
may be a factor. However, I'm sure I'll get better with practice.


Who cares? Go buy a Maro brothers game. You can see your score rise on
those!